Tinhorn Tony Self-Destructs Again

A recent Pistrina article, Fatal Vision, noted, amongst other things, Erroneous Antonius Cekada’s ill-fated foray into cyber stardom: a YouTube video about sedevacantism.  Tony’s video was in response to Messrs. Salza and Siscoe’s book, True or False Pope.  Cekada’s video, in turn, drew a response from the conservative publication The Remnant.  In their response, The Remnant noted that Tony attacked not only Salza and Siscoe (and their book, even though he had not yet read it!), but a host of other people as well (click here for The Remnant’s response) -- accusing them of doing what they do (or holding the views they do) for mercenary reasons.  Tony’s video was a textbook example, as The Remnant so rightly put it, of “ad hominem attacks and oversimplifications.”

Among those whom Tony attacked were the SSPX’s Bishop Fellay, the late Father Nicholas Gruner, and even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Tony either insinuating or stating outright that they held their positions for “money” reasons.  Of course, Tony also slights Salza and Siscoe’s credentials, pointing that they are lawyers, not theologians.  Well, they may not be theologians, but their credentials are real.  Tony is neither a theologian nor a canonical “expert” (both of which he pretends to be) – and he possesses no degrees in either of those fields.  Salza and Siscoe’s credentials, on the other hand, are real, and from accredited institutions.

Tony’s accusing Fellay, Gruner, and Lefebvre for holding their views for “money” reasons is nothing new, by the way.  That’s an old tactic of his, dating back at least to his attack on the late Abbot Leonard Giardina – in a Quidlibet article in 2011 -- when he accused him of being “non-committal” for exactly the same reasons: 

“Father’s caginess on the pope question,” Tony began, “and his repeated ‘We’re-too-spiritual-for-controversies’ protests, though, struck me as nothing more than a clever two-pronged fundraising ploy: (1) Say absolutely nothing about the pope, so you can hit up all categories of traditionalists for donations: sedevacantists, SSPX-ers, independents, and Motu types.  (2) Play up the ‘I’m-only-a-humble-unworldly-monk’ routine.  On the latter point, having spent some time as a monk myself, I am well aware how some of the sons of St. Benedict ham up the ‘humble monk’ shtick [our boldface] whenever they sniff the scent of a potential big benefactor.  The double formula was a gold mine for Christ the King Abbey.  Fr. Giardina played it to the hilt, and the bucks rolled in.”

The fact that Tony wrote the foregoing about Abbot Giardina shortly after the abbot died (when he therefore couldn’t respond) makes Tony’s unsolicited (and pointless) vilification all the more uncharitable -- and cowardly.  It’s curious, too, that Tony used the word “shtick” – because that exactly describes Tony himself.  His writing style has always been that way: trite, smug, condescending, and sarcastic -- unscholarly in tone as well as in fact.  And, as always, Tony ignores a person’s argument, but attacks the person instead: classic “ad hominem.”  (But this is just one of the many ways in which Dannie and Tony have always tried to make themselves look good by making others look bad.*)  It’s also the height of hypocrisy that Tony accuses the abbot of being mercenary – because, again, that exactly describes Tony himself (and, for that matter, Dannie too).

At one time, the deceptive duo was able to get away with this sort of nonsense, because, for the most part, their audience was a captive and/or gullible one.  But in recent years, that has been changing.  The beginning of that transformation process was probably when Cekada made his depraved comments about Schiavo.  Since then, just about everything he has written has been exposed (especially by Pistrina) as the know-nothing drivel that it is.  Tony’s reputation as a “scholar” is now “in the toilet.”  And just recently, after the double fiasco of SGG’s mistake-riddled “Ordo 2016” and its “All Saints Calendar” (that contains, not saints, but grainy pictures of the cult center), SGG’s “reputation” has all but evaporated.

And now, the coup de grâce: Tony, in his ineffable non-wisdom (and arrogance), decided to pick a fight with Messrs. Salza and Siscoe (and their book, True or False Pope?), and to make a YouTube video about it.  As Pistrina noted, this has attracted a yet even wider audience (including The Remnant) – people with real intelligence and real credentials -- who are tearing Tinhorn Tony to shreds.  Plus, as Pistrina also noted, Donald Sanborn has now been sucked into the maelstrom:  a 2009 interview (between him and Stephen Heiner) has come to light; and it has been thoroughly picked apart, this time again by Messrs. Salza and Siscoe (see Pistrina article, Edge of Doom, and its interview link).  And, as Pistrina rightly concluded, both Tony and Donnie are now the laughing stock of Trad Nation.

The bottom line of all this new exposure is that the SGG/Brooksville parasites are no longer hidden (and protected) from world view.  They’re now under the spotlight of public scrutiny, and they are being exposed for the shams that they are.  And, actually, even the cult-masters’ followers are starting to take notice.  They are no longer automatically swallowing everything the cult-masters say or do.  On the contrary, their one-time blind obedience has given way to questioning and to skepticism; and that skepticism is fast morphing into discontent – especially with respect to funding mid-winter junkets to sunny climes, paying for the cult-masters’ unneeded new toys, and being bombarded with incessant pleas for money to fix the prematurely crumbling cult center.**  In short, what Dannie and Tony could count on before, they can no longer count on now. 

So, by his preemptive attack on Messrs. Salza and Siscoe, Tony -- to repeat -- has only managed to draw wider attention not only to himself but to Big Don as well, thereby awakening opposition in even more people, and thus further swelling the ranks of those who are finding the cult-masters out for the humbugs that they are.  We thank him, then, for that masterful bit of self-destruction.  That, coupled with SGG’s other recent fiascos, should at long last cement the cult-masters’ reputations as frauds – and amateur frauds at that.  And if they continue to open their mouths, they will only make things worse for themselves.  And count on them to do just that – because they never learn from their mistakes.  We look forward to that process continuing, because it will hasten their demise – and, at long last, rid the world of these parasites.

________________________________

* Playing the “blame game” is one of Dannie’s favorite ploys, such as, his blaming the local power utility (Duke Energy) for SGG’s “high heating bills” -- or blaming the local community authorities for imposing “unfair” building codes on SGG).  His latest bit of mud-slinging was his insinuation – in his Feb. 14 Bishop’s(?) Corner -- that some local SSPX parishioners do not hold the “traditional” fast and abstinence.  In it, he stated, “On Friday of course we abstain.  How odd (I really can’t get over it!) that our Kentucky cousins are now eating hamburgers on Friday as their one solitary gesture of solidarity with the Novus Ordo Pope. Imagine it! Friday abstinence is no more for them. Their parents and grandparents, what must they be thinking?”  (What they’re thinking, Dannie, is how much of a HYPOCRITE you are to say what you did – you, who pigged out on “copious quantities of meat” while you were spending Lent in warm, sunny Mexico a few years ago!)

The “Kentucky cousins” to whom Dannie was referring, by the way, are those SGG’s former parishioners who left after the school scandals of 2009 (and even before that), who formed an SSPX congregation in northern Kentucky.  Dannie implies that -- since the SSPX is in communion with Rome (and therefore not bound by “traditional” fast and abstinence rules) – these people aren’t following those rules.  But many SSPX Catholics (and others) DO follow the traditional rules, even though technically they’re not bound to do so – and we’d venture to say that many (if not most) of those “Kentucky cousins” do so as well.

The truth is, it was Dannie who didn’t fast and abstain (when he was in Mexico two years ago).  It was HE who used a “technicality” (that Latin America is not bound by those rules) to excuse himself from those rules at the time – perhaps “legal,” but certainly not in the spirit of Lent.  Dannie has no problem with taking advantage of a technicality, yet has a problem with those “Kentucky cousins” doing the same.  At any rate, we’re sure that many of those SSPX folks do NOT take advantage of their “technicality,” as Dannie did.  And whether they do or not, what business is that of his?  At the very least, it was grossly uncharitable of Dirt-bag Dan to mention what he did.  Why did he feel the need to sling mud at his former parishioners?  What did he hope to gain by it?

** Speaking of “travel junkets,” we notice that Dannie was off to warm, sunny Mexico again this Lent: “I’m in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico and El Paso, Texas today, administering Confirmation to Fr. Mardones’ two congregations in a quick visit.”  It seems that Dannie just can’t get through Lent without heading “down south”!  And, since when, we must ask, are confirmations done during Lent?  Couldn’t Dannie have picked a more “traditional” time to do it?  Why now, Dannie?  (And how much did your “quick visit” cost?)